The Rich Man, Lazarus, and Abraham. - Christadelphiachristadelphia.org/pamphlet/p_lazarus.pdf · 4...

21
T T h h e e R R i i c c h h M M a a n n , , L L a a z z a a r r u u s s , , a a n n d d A A b b r r a a h h a a m m . . by Steven Cox Cover illustration: Caiaphas rending his clothes in anger (detail from Giotto ‘Christ before Caiaphas’) Scripture quotations taken from the HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION ®, Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society. Used by permission of Zondervan Inc. Quotations from Apocalypse of Zephaniah, 4 Maccabees, and Testament of Abraham taken from J.H. Charlesworth, THE OLD TESTAMENT PSEUDEPIGRAPHA, 2 vols., Copyright © Doubleday, New York 1983. References to ‘Bosom of Abraham’ in Kiddushin 72b and Ekah 1:85 are cited from L. Ginzberg, LEGENDS OF THE JEWS, republished John Hopkins, 1998, Vol.5, p. 269. Quotations from Josephus taken from JOSEPHUS COMPLETE WORKS, translated by William Whiston, republished Kregel Publications, Grand Rapids, 1966. But note that ‘The Discourse to the Greeks on Hades’ found in this edition of Josephus is not genuine. It is by Hippolytus of Rome c.400AD, and is based on Luke 16. ISBN: 81-87409-56-8 (second printing December 2000) Published and printed by: Printland Publishers G.P.O. Box 159, Hyderabad 500 001, India to whom all enquiries should be addressed if there is no local address given on the last page of this booklet.

Transcript of The Rich Man, Lazarus, and Abraham. - Christadelphiachristadelphia.org/pamphlet/p_lazarus.pdf · 4...

TThhee RRiicchh MMaann,,LLaazzaarruuss,,

aanndd AAbbrraahhaamm..

by Steven Cox

Cover illustration: Caiaphas rending his clothes in anger (detail from Giotto ‘Christ before Caiaphas’)

Scripture quotations taken from the HOLY BIBLE, NEW INTERNATIONAL VERSION ®,

Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society. Used by permission of Zondervan Inc.

Quotations from Apocalypse of Zephaniah, 4 Maccabees, and Testament of Abraham

taken from J.H. Charlesworth, THE OLD TESTAMENT PSEUDEPIGRAPHA,

2 vols., Copyright © Doubleday, New York 1983.

References to ‘Bosom of Abraham’ in Kiddushin 72b and Ekah 1:85 are cited from L. Ginzberg,

LEGENDS OF THE JEWS, republished John Hopkins, 1998, Vol.5, p. 269.

Quotations from Josephus taken from JOSEPHUS COMPLETE WORKS, translated by William Whiston, republished Kregel Publications, Grand Rapids, 1966.

But note that ‘The Discourse to the Greeks on Hades’ found in this edition of Josephus is not genuine.It is by Hippolytus of Rome c.400AD, and is based on Luke 16.

ISBN: 81-87409-56-8(second printing December 2000)

Published and printed by:

Printland PublishersG.P.O. Box 159,

Hyderabad 500 001, India

to whom all enquiries should be addressed if thereis no local address given on the last page of this booklet.

2

CCoonntteennttss

Luke 16:19-31................................................................................................................. 3

Introduction..................................................................................................................... 4

A unique story................................................................................................................. 4

Bible teaching on death................................................................................................... 5

Understanding Parables ................................................................................................... 7

The Parable of the Weeds................................................................................................ 8

The Parable of the Great Banquet .................................................................................... 8

The Parable of the Lost Son ............................................................................................ 9

The Parable of the Dishonest Manager ............................................................................ 9

The Rich Man and Lazarus............................................................................................ 10

The Bosom of Abraham ................................................................................................ 14

Why Did Jesus Use the Pharisee’s Doctrine?................................................................ 17

Conclusions................................................................................................................... 21

Questions ...................................................................................................................... 21

3

LUKE 16:19-31

19 There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxuryevery day.

20 At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores,

21 and longing to eat what fell from the Rich Man’s table. Even the dogs came andlicked his sores.

22 The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham’s side.The Rich Man also died and was buried.

23 In Hell, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, withLazarus by his side.

24 So he called to him, ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip thetip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire’.

25 But Abraham replied, ‘Son remember that in your lifetime you received your goodthings, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you arein agony.

26 And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so that thosewho want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone else cross over from there tous.’

27 He answered, ‘Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my father’s house,

28 for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to thisplace of torment.

29 Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’

30 ‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they willrepent.’

31 He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets they will not beconvinced even if someone rises from the dead’ (NIV)

4

TThhee RRiicchh MMaann,, LLaazzaarruuss,, aanndd AAbbrraahhaamm

INTRODUCTION

Sometimes in the Bible it is obvious when a parable is a parable, and when real events arereal events. Sometimes the reader can easily distinguish between things to be takenliterally and things to be taken figuratively.

But this is not always so simple. Many times when Jesus spoke in parables peoplemisunderstood and took him literally. For example, Jesus once said, when visiting thetemple in Jerusalem, “Destroy this temple and I will raise it again in three days”. Thoselistening all thought he was speaking literally about the real temple and objected “It hastaken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it in three days?”.Yet the Gospel writer notes “But the temple he had spoken of was his body” (John 2:20).In other words he was talking figuratively, in a kind of parable.

Even Jesus’ own disciples were often confused by his figurative speech and parables.For example on another occasion he told his disciples to “be on your guard against theyeast of the Pharisees and the Sadducees” and they misunderstood, thinking that he wasreproaching them for having forgotten to buy bread. Then he explained to them that hewas talking figuratively; the yeast was the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees(Matthew 16:6-7,11-12).

It is easy to smile at these mistakes by the people of Jesus’ day, and forget that we arereading the account including the explanation! Without the explanation we wouldprobably be just as confused as those to whom Jesus first spoke the words.

A UNIQUE STORY

The story of the Rich Man and Lazarus is one of the best known in the Bible because it isunique in several ways.

1. Firstly, it is unique because, although its style resembles a parable, and also it comesimmediately after a series of four other parables (parables of the lost sheep, lost coin,prodigal son, dishonest manager), it certainly is not a usual parable. The parables ofJesus normally concern nature, everyday life, customs and society, not startlingvisions of the underworld, complete with fire and chasms.

2. Secondly, this parable, if we can properly call it a parable, is the only one in whichreal people - Abraham, Lazarus - are named.

The Rich Man, Lazarus, and Abraham

5

3. Thirdly, it is unique because the teachings in this story clearly contradict the rest ofthe Bible’s teaching about what happens after death. For example no other supportcan be found anywhere in the Bible for the idea that ‘souls’ live on after death, orthat the ‘souls’ of good and wicked go to different places. Or that Abraham iswaiting to welcome the dead. This may surprise some readers, but popular ideasabout souls going to heaven or hell, and so on, are not taught in the Bible. In factthey are repeatedly denied in both Old and New Testaments. Elsewhere in the Bible“the dead know nothing”. (More on this subject in a moment).

4. Finally, Jesus uses various phrases (such as “the Bosom of Abraham”) and images(such as the chasm separating the underworld in two) which are only found outsidethe Bible. In fact these terms are only found in 1st Century Jewish mythology.(More on this subject also).

BIBLE TEACHING ON DEATH

Before looking at Luke 16:19-31 in detail it is probably necessary to support the assertionmade above that the Bible teaches that “the dead know nothing”.

That phrase is actually a quote from the Bible (Ecclesiastes 9:5). Similar comments canbe found in Ecclesiastes 3:19-20 and 9:10. These verses are so clear, and so clearlycontradict popular church teaching about the ‘immortal soul’ (a phrase never found in theBible), that many modern Christians reject the book of Ecclesiastes as being ‘the work ofa man without faith’. This is extremely short sighted as it is not only Ecclesiastes butalmost every book in the Bible which contains this teaching. If someone rejectsEcclesiastes, because they find its teaching unpalatable, they will eventually have to doso with the entire Old Testament and then the New Testament as well.

It is not going to be possible to cover the entire subject of life, death, and the nature ofman in a few lines. If you are not sure what the Bible teaches on this subject it would bebetter to write to the address on the back cover for a copy of the leaflet Life After Death.However the main points of Bible teaching are as follows:

1. Man’s ‘soul’ is made up of two parts - dust and breath:See Genesis 2:7(where “living soul” is the same Hebrew phrase as “living creatures” inGenesis 1:21,24, 9:10,12,15,16 etc.) Job 27:3, 33:4-6, Psalm 104:30, 1Corinthians 15:45(where the “soul” of Adam is the same Greek word psyche as “life” or “lives” inMatthew 2:20, 6:25, 10:39, 20:28, Acts 15:26, 20:10,24, 27:10, John 10:11, 15,17,13:37,38, Romans 11:3, Philippians 2:30, 1John 3:16, Revelation 8:9 etc.).

The Rich Man, Lazarus, and Abraham

6

2. When man dies the breath returns to God who gave it, and man returns to dust:

See Genesis 3:19, 6:3, 18:27, Job 7:21, 21:26, 34:14-15, Psalm 37:20, 49:10-14, 55:23,76:12, 88:5, 90:3-6, 103:14, 104:29, 112:10, 140:10, 146:4*, Ecclesiastes 3:19-20*,12:7*, Isaiah 26:14, 43:17, 51:39, Ezekiel 18:4, Nahum 3:18, John 6:49, Romans 5:12-14, James 2:26. (* in the asterixed verses English Bibles have “spirit” but the Hebrew hasthe same word ruakh as the “breath” in the animals of Genesis 6:17, 7:15 etc. The wordruakh does not mean a conscious spirit).

3. Those who have known God ‘sleep in the dust’ - meaning that they restunconscious until Christ returns:

See 2 Samuel 7:12, (and likewise 1 Kings 2:10, 11:43, 14:20, 31, 15:8, 24, 16:6, 28,22:40, 50 etc. etc.), Job 10:21, 13:12-15, 14:21, Psalm 6:5, 13:3, 30:9, 31:17, 49:17-20,88:10-11, 115:17, Ecclesiastes 9:4-6, 10, Isaiah 38:18, John 3:13, 11:11-13, Acts 2:29,34,13:36, 1 Corinthians 15:51.

4. Only then will man rise from the dust to be judged, and, if accepted, live foreverin Christ’s Kingdom on earth.

See Job 33:25, Psalm 22:29, 37:11,22,29,34, 49:15, 116:15, Isaiah 26:19, 57:1, Jeremiah23:5, Ezekiel 21:27, Daniel 12:2-3, Matthew 5:5, 6:10, 8:11, 22:23-32, 23:39, 25:34,Mark 13:32, 14:25, Luke 1:33, 17:24, 20:35-38, John 5:21-22, 28-30, 6:39-40,44,54,11:24-25, 14:6, Acts 1:6-7,11, 4:2, 17:18,32, 23:6, 24:15,21, 26:6-8,23, Romans 2:16,4:17, 6:5, 14:10, 1 Corinthians 6:14, 15:12-14,20-23, 49-55, 2 Corinthians 5:10,Philippians 3:11, Colossians 3:4, 1 Thessalonians 4:13-16, 5:23, 2 Timothy 4:1, Hebrews11:13,19,39-40, Revelation 5:10.

There are some complications to the simple explanation above because of the way thatBible translations sometimes reflect church traditions rather than the literal text. So aphrase which conflicts with traditional beliefs such as “do not go near a dead soul”(Numbers 6:6) is translated as “do not go near a dead body”. When Joshua “struck allthe souls with the edge of the sword” (Joshua 10:28,30,32,37,39) it is translated“people”. And so on.

One solution to this problem is a concordance (such as Young’s, Wigram’s, or Strong’s),but in many countries these cost more than a month’s wage. Alternatively some readersuse two Bibles, a modern one for general reading, and an older version for checkingdifficult passages. Either way it is worth noting in the margin of one’s Bible the literalmeaning of the text, so that it can be remembered the next time it is read.

The Rich Man, Lazarus, and Abraham

7

Back to Luke 16....

So the picture of the afterlife given in the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus contradictsall the Bible verses given above.

Something that is even stranger, given the popularity of Luke 16 in the churches as aproof text on heaven and hell, is that it also contradicts church traditions.

If Abraham is really in a place where one can communicate across a chasm with thewicked, burning in another part of the underworld, then he is not in heaven. Luke16:22-26 clearly has nothing to do with the popular picture of heaven.

Some churches have attempted to get round this by saying that the Bosom of Abrahamwas under the earth when Jesus spoke but is in heaven now. Apart from the lack of anyBible support for such an idea, what exactly does it achieve?

UNDERSTANDING PARABLES

If we are going to understand Luke 16:19-31 we have to do so in the context of the rest ofthe Bible.

But first, it is worth noting that the Parables of the New Testament are not simple storieslike the fairy tales that we tell children. They can be, and were intended to be, difficult tounderstand:

“This is why I speak to them in parables: ‘Though seeing they do not see, thoughhearing they do not understand’” (Matthew 13:13)

“Although I have been speaking figuratively, a time is coming when I will no longeruse this kind of language but will tell you plainly”. (John16:25)

The explanation of Luke 16:19-31 which will follow requires a little thought, but thenGod gave us brains that we might use them:

“Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves” (Matthew 10:16)

“Brothers, stop thinking like children. In regard to evil be infants, but in your thinkingbe adults.” (1Corinthians 14:20)

The Rich Man, Lazarus, and Abraham

8

Here is an example of a parable that is more than just a simple ‘story’:

THE PARABLE OF THE WEEDS

In Matthew 13:24-30 there is a parable about a farmer who finds weeds growing in hisfield. The interesting thing about this parable is that it is one of very few where Jesuslater (13:36-39) explained the meaning to the disciples:

The sower = ChristThe field = the worldGood seeds = good peopleBad seeds = bad peopleThe enemy = the DevilThe reapers = the angelsThe harvest = the end of the age

There is no confusion here because Jesus himself gave the identification of the charactersin the parable. We now turn to some of the parables in Luke which lead up to that of theRich Man and Lazarus:

THE PARABLE OF THE GREAT BANQUET

In Luke 14:16-24 Jesus tells a parable about a man sending out invitations to a feast. Butthe invited guests are too busy with business to accept the invitation. The host thenbecomes angry and invites the poor and outsiders instead.

It is easy to see that the characters in the parable are all real people, or groups of people:

Host of the banquet = GodServant sent to call guests = ChristGuests who make excuses = the rich JewsThe poor and sick of the town= the poor JewsThose from outside the town = the Gentiles

Also it was based on real life circumstances. When he told this parable Jesus was actuallypresent at a banquet (see 14:1), and his audience included exactly the kind of people whowere excluded in the parable (14:7).

The Rich Man, Lazarus, and Abraham

9

THE PARABLE OF THE LOST SON

In Luke 15:11-16 we have another parable. The mention of the far country and pigs inv.15 suggests the same subject:

The father = GodOlder son = JewsYounger son = Gentiles

Again, real people, real local circumstances.

THE PARABLE OF THE DISHONEST MANAGER

In Luke 16:1-13 we have a much more complex subject. This parable is often misread asteaching that churches should imitate the world when handling money. But Jesus makesit clear that he is talking about “the Pharisees who were lovers of money” (v.14). Whenthey laughed at the parable he turned to them and said “You are the ones!” (v.15).

The master = GodThe dishonest manager = the PhariseesThe debtors = the people

Instead of the bills being literally money owed to God, the Pharisees were reducing whatthe people owed to God in terms of worship and righteousness (v.17). It appears thatJesus particularly had in mind the Pharisee practice of selling letters of divorce (v.18).

This information allows us to reconsider why the master had “commended” his servantfor conspiring with his creditors to cheat him (v.8). What master in real life would dothis? This cheated master can only be speaking with bitter irony. Certainly, in the nextverses, Jesus had nothing good to say about the dishonest manager (vs.10-13).

The key to understanding this strange ‘commendation’ (v.8) is in the Old Testament. The“eternal dwellings” (v.9), refer to the “eternal home” of the grave (Ecclesiastes 12:5).And the so-called “friends” waiting there, are those already dead (Psalm 49:11-14).Therefore:

The master’s bills = God’s lawsEternal dwellings = the grave

Again, the parable concerns real people, real local problems and contemporary issues.And, most importantly, the key to the answer was in the Old Testament.

The Rich Man, Lazarus, and Abraham

10

THE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS

We now come to the last of the parables in this section of Luke, the one with which weare concerned. One important point: there is no break between the “You are the ones!”(Luke 16:15) spoken to the Pharisees and the Lazarus parable. This suggests that thePharisees were the audience of this parable as well.

Who are the characters?

The Rich Man = ?His father = ?His five brothers = ?Lazarus = ?Abraham = ?

It seems easiest to start where there is likely to be most agreement, that Abraham is theAbraham of Genesis.

Next easiest is Lazarus. There is only one person of this name found in the Bible, namelyLazarus of Bethany, the brother of Mary and Martha who was raised from the dead byJesus in John 11:1-44. Comparing the parallel accounts of the anointing in Bethany inJohn 12:3 and Matthew 26:6 we find that Lazarus’ other name was Simon, and that hehad been a leper. The leprosy must have been healed when Christ raised Lazarus fromthe dead, but he was still known as “Simon the Leper”.

This explains why the Lazarus in the parable was “full of sores” (Luke 16:20). Thebegging had nothing to do with poverty, it was because he was unclean. According to theLaw of Moses, Simon would have been ceremonially unclean and could not enter hisown house in Bethany; “he must live outside the camp” (Leviticus 13:46).

So we have two men, both Jews, both called Lazarus, both beggars, both lepers, both ofwhom died, and both of whom would not convince people by their resurrection (compareLuke 16:30-31 and John 12:10).

This is too many coincidences for them not to have been the same person. So:

Abraham = AbrahamLazarus = Lazarus

This would lead us to expect the Rich Man is also someone known to the audience of theparable.

The Rich Man, Lazarus, and Abraham

11

Who was the Rich Man?

Reading through the story we can find the following clues to the identity of the RichMan:

1. he was rich (vs.19)2. dressed in purple and fine linen (vs.19)3. lived in luxury every day (vs.19)4. in his lifetime he received good things (vs.25)5. he had five brothers (vs.28)6. they lived in his father’s house (vs.27)7. they had Moses and the Prophets (vs.25)8. but they did not listen to them (vs.29)9. they would not be convinced even if someone were to rise from the dead (vs.31)

It is not obvious to the modern reader who this Rich Man is. But it should be clear thatthe picture is much too detailed to simply be ‘a representative of all rich men’.

But the Pharisees listening would have known immediately whom Christ was referringto. There was not any chance of their mistaking it, because only one man in Israeldressed in purple and fine linen. A man who fitted exactly all the clues which Jesus gaveas to the identity of the Rich Man.

As in Luke’s previous parable of the Dishonest Steward, the key to the meaning lies inthe Old Testament. In Exodus 28 we find the instructions given to Aaron for making thehigh priest’s garments; “blue, purple, and scarlet yarn and fine linen” (note Exodus28:5-8,15,31,39). The Pharisees could not fail to understand that the man dressed inpurple and fine linen was the Jewish high priest.

The Name of the Rich Man

The high priest when Jesus spoke this parable was Caiaphas. We know from the Jewishhistorian Josephus, who wrote a detailed account of the period in Antiquities of the Jews,that Caiaphas met all 4 of the first qualifications of the Rich Man of Luke 16:

1. he was rich (v.19)2. dressed in purple and fine linen (v.19)3. lived in luxury every day (v.19)4. in his lifetime he received good things (v.25)

(see Antiquities, XIII: 10:vi:p.281, XVIII:1:iv:p.377, also Wars of the Jews 11:8:xiv: p. 478)

The Rich Man, Lazarus, and Abraham

12

His Father’s House

In Luke 3:2 and Acts 4:6 we meet the other high priest who served with Caiaphas, Annas,who was “father-in-law to Caiaphas” (John 18:13). Josephus also records that Caiaphasserved as high priest 18-35AD at the time of Jesus’ ministry. Annas had been removedfrom his office by the Romans for openly resisting them, but behind the scenes heretained his authority and position. This is why in John 18:13-24 Jesus is first tried byAnnas, and only afterwards sent to Caiaphas (v.28), but then Caiaphas, not Annas, sendsJesus to Pilate (v.29).

Five Brothers

In case anyone listening did not understand who He meant, Christ was even morespecific: The “five brothers” Christ mentions are the five other high priests, who were infact his five brothers-in-law, the five sons of Annas. The historian Josephus records:

“Now the report goes, that this elder Annas proved a most fortunate man; for he hadfive sons, who had all performed the office of a high priest to God, and he had himselfenjoyed that dignity a long time formerly, which had never happened to any other ofour high priests. . .” (Antiquities, Book XX, chapter 9, section i, p.423)

The years they served are as follows:

Eleazar 16-17ADJonathan 36-37ADTheophilus 37-41ADMatthias 41-43ADAnnas the Younger 62AD

As mentioned above, the years 18-35AD between Eleazar and Jonathan were occupied byCaiaphas. Between 43-62AD the high priests were taken from other families than ofAnnas. Finally in 70AD the temple was destroyed and the high priesthood along with it.

This confirms the list of coincidences between the Rich Man and Caiaphas:

5. he had five brothers (v.28)6. they lived in his father’s house (v.27)7. they had Moses and the Prophets (v.25)8. but they did not listen to them (v.29)

The Rich Man, Lazarus, and Abraham

13

The final coincidence is confirmed when after the resurrection of Simon of Bethany, weread that “the chief priests made plans to kill Lazarus as well, for on account of himmany of the Jews were going over to Jesus and putting their faith in him” (John 12:10)

9. they would not be convinced even if someone were to rise from the dead(v.31)

John 12:10 also confirms another coincidence between the Lazarus of the parable andSimon Lazarus of Bethany. The resurrection of both was rejected by Annas and his fivesons.

Summary so far

We have established the identity of all the characters:

Abraham = AbrahamLazarus = Simon the Leper of BethanyThe Rich Man = CaiaphasHis father = AnnasHis 5 brothers = Eleazar, Jonathan, Theophilus,

Matthias, Annas the Younger

But what does the parable mean?

At the Rich Man’s Gate

“At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores, and longing to eatfrom the Rich Man’s table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores.” (vs. 20-21)

As we noted in considering the real Lazarus, when a Jew contracted a disease theybecame ‘unclean’. They were at most allowed only into the outer court of the temple.This meant the unclean were no longer allowed to eat from the sacrifices offered in theinner court. In this way Simon of Bethany was barred from eating at the table ofCaiaphas in Jerusalem.

There is similar language in Matthew 15 when the Canaanite woman (who was a ‘Gentiledog’ as far as the Pharisees were concerned) said to Jesus “Even the dogs eat the crumbswhich fall from their master’s table” (Matthew 15:27).

The Rich Man, Lazarus, and Abraham

14

It may be that before he died Simon the Leper literally did beg outside the temple. Butthe meaning here is deeper than begging for food. Jesus is saying that the weak, theunclean, and the poor, were all denied spiritual food by the ruling caste of high priests.

THE BOSOM OF ABRAHAM

“The time came when the beggar died, and the angels carried him to Abraham’s side”(v.22 NIV).

Now this is where the story starts to become difficult. Nowhere else in the Bible does itsay that when men die they go to Abraham’s side. In older Bibles it reads “bosom ofAbraham”, meaning the lap of Abraham.

Today there are a hundred and one different theories about death. Many people seriouslybelieve when they die they will go up to the gates of Heaven, to be met by the ApostlePeter. Others believe other things. But the idea that the dead go to sit 'in the lap' ofAbraham is something that nobody today believes.

But people did believe it in Jesus' day. Mentions of "the bosom of Abraham, Isaac, andJacob" have been found in burial papyri (cf. papyrus Preisigke Sb 2034:11). In earlyRabbinical legends "the Bosom of Abraham" was where the righteous went. (cf.Kiddushin 72b, Ekah 1:85). It is not in the Bible of course, but it was popularly believed.While the NIV has "to Abraham's side", the literal AV rendering "to the bosom ofAbraham" is better as the 'Bosom of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob', was a specific concept incontemporary popular belief.

Another source showing what Jews of Jesus' day believed is a book called 4 Maccabees,which was probably written by Jews in Egypt about a generation after Christ. In this workof fiction Abraham, Isaac and Jacob receive and welcome Jewish martyrs into the worldof the dead:

"After our death in this fashion Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob will receive us and all ourforefathers will praise us" (4 Maccabees 13:17).

Again, this is not Bible teaching, only popular superstition.

The Rich Man in Hell

The story becomes even more difficult when we read the next verse:

The Rich Man, Lazarus, and Abraham

15

"The Rich Man also died and was buried. In Hell where he was in torment he looked upand saw Abraham far away with Lazarus in his bosom. So he called to him, 'FatherAbraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water andcool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire'." (vs. 23-24)

Even with the most fertile imagination it is difficult to believe that from Hell one can seepeople in Heaven and talk to them. But the story gets stranger still:

"But Abraham replied. 'Son remember that in your ilfetime you received your goodthings, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are inagony. And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been fixed, so thatthose who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone else cross over fromthere to us". (vs. 25-26)

Nothing else in the Bible prepares us for this description of Hell. Again the parable of theRich Man and Lazarus turns out to be unique.

Which Hell?

We need to clarify what the word 'Hell' means here, as in English Bibles (unlike manyAsian Bibles) two words have been confused into one.

'Hell' in the English Bible can be one of two words in the original Greek text:

1. Hades, the grave, the pit, the place where the dead sleep. In the Old Testament knownas Sheol (Genesis 37:35, 42:38, 44:29, Job 14:13, Psalm 6:5, 16:10, 139:8, Ecclesiastes9:10, Matthew 16:18). In the Bible all people go to Hades to await the resurrection (1Corinthians 15:55, Revelation 1:8, 20:13). Even Jesus was in Hades for 3 days and 3nights (Psalm 16:10, Acts 2:27,31).

2. Gehenna, originally the name of the valley Gehenna on the south side of Jerusalem.In the Old Testament the valley was known as Ben Hinnom (Jeremiah 7:31). In theNew Testament the name is associated with the fire in which the rejected will bedestroyed at the last judgement (Matthew 5:22,29,30, 18:9, 23:15,33, Mark 9:43,45,47,Luke 12:5, James 3:6)

The problem is that in Luke 16:23 the ‘Hell’ described does not fit either of these Bibledefinitions. In fact the word is Hades, but it clearly does not fit with the Hades of“silence” (Psalm 31:17), where Jesus was laid (Acts 2:25-28 quoting Psalm 16:8-11).There are 9 other mentions of Hades in the New Testament, 50 in the Old. All theseother references present Hades as the grave. Luke 16:23 is the odd one out.

The Rich Man, Lazarus, and Abraham

16

The source for the unusual Hades in Luke 16:23, as with the source for the ‘Bosom ofAbraham’ itself, lies outside the Bible in the myths of the 1st Century. Many Jewishmyths survive today (eg. in the Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha, Dead Sea Scrolls, Talmud,etc.). In these works a variety of fantastic pictures of Hades are given that have noconnection with the Old Testament. One of the closest to the picture given in Luke16:23-24 is in a work called The Apocalypse of Zephaniah.

False Beliefs about Hades

It needs to be said that The Apocalypse of Zephaniah has nothing to do with theZephaniah who wrote the book of that name in the Bible. The real Zephaniah lived in thedays of King Josiah about 620BC. The so-called Apocalypse of Zephaniah on the otherhand, was written by an unknown Jewish author, and probably a Pharisee, some timearound150AD. In other words, the book is a fake.It is interesting however because the myth shows us what many Jews in Jesus’ daybelieved. The details are not exactly the same as in Luke 16:23-24; for example in theApocalypse of Zephaniah the chasm between the fiery part of Hades and the part given toAbraham has a giant river running through it. In fact the author recounts the fictionalZephaniah’s journey across the river in a boat steered by an angel:

“You have escaped from the abyss and Hades, you will now cross over the crossingplace... then he ran to all the righteous ones, namely Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Enoch,Elijah and David” (Apoc. Zeph. 9:2).

Another difference is that in Luke 16 only Abraham is mentioned. In the Apocalypse ofZephaniah all three patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, are in the side of theunderworld reserved for the righteous, along with Enoch, Elijah and David.

But the differences are minor, and there are enough common points, and more in manyother Jewish myths, to suggest that the content of the Rich Man and Lazarus parable hassome relation to contemporary Jewish ideas, and in particular to popular Phariseeteachings.

The Pharisees and the ‘Sinners’

We have established above that the picture of Hades, the Bosom of Abraham, and thechasm between them, represents the Pharisees’ teaching, or at least popular Jewish belief,rather than Jesus’ own teaching.

The Rich Man, Lazarus, and Abraham

17

All this is, however, only half of the Pharisees’ teaching. The other half concerns thePharisees’ ideas about exactly who would go to be with “Father Abraham” (Luke 3:8),and who would go to the fiery side of Hades.

According to the Pharisees all the ‘sinners’, meaning publicans, tax-collectors, the poor,the crippled, the blind, the lame, lepers, people with other skin diseases, the insane, and,of course, Gentiles and Samaritans, would burn in the fire.

Only those who followed all the rules of the Law, as did the “righteous” - meaning therich and respectable, the scribes, the experts in the Law, the rulers of the synagogues, thepriests and high priests, and of course the Pharisees themselves - would depart to be with“Father Abraham”. “Our father Abraham” is a common phrase in the Jewish Mishnah(e.g. Aboth 3:12; 5:2,3,6,19; 6:10; Taanith 2:4,5)

What the Pharisees did NOT teach

But note that the Pharisees did not teach that the righteous went to Heaven. Even theyknew that “no man has ascended into Heaven” (John 3.13). Heaven was for God alone(Psalm 115:16) and to teach otherwise would have been blasphemy.

The Pharisees also did not teach that Abraham’s Bosom was the final destination of therighteous. The Pharisees taught a resurrection and judgement on earth. Abraham’sBosom was only a waiting station.

With the above in mind it is surprising that so many people quote the story of the RichMan and Lazarus as proof of the doctrine of heaven going. Not only does the story notmention the word heaven once, this description of Abraham’s Bosom bears noresemblance to any ideas about Heaven taught anywhere.

WHY DID JESUS USE THE PHARISEE’S DOCTRINE?

We have shown that the teaching about Hades and Abraham’s Bosom is not from theBible, but from contemporary Jewish superstition. This helps us on the fundamentalprinciple that the Bible does not contradict itself - but creates an even bigger problem:Surely Jesus would not approve false teaching?! - the idea itself is abhorrent.

The answer: “Well, it was only a parable” solves nothing. Even in a parable we wouldexpect consistent teaching. It would have been equally possible for Christ to have toldthe parable in a way that fits with Old Testament teaching. Christ certainly did not needto refer to Hades, the great chasm, Abraham’s Bosom, and “Father Abraham”.

The Rich Man, Lazarus, and Abraham

18

So we have to conclude that Christ had a good reason to do so.

An Unacceptable Solution

Another answer is: “Christ was accommodating himself to his listeners to get themessage across”. But this also will not do. Admittedly there are examples of Christspeaking to the poor and the simple in terms that they would understand. But never to thedisciples, and certainly not to the Pharisees, did Christ ‘accommodate’ his words to falseteachings in order to make other points understood.

Neither would his disciples. Paul even specifically warns about the various Jewishbooks, such as Apocalypse of Zephaniah, which circulated in the first Century:

“Pay no attention to Jewish myths” (Titus 1:14)

Yet we still have to explain why the parable of the rich man and Lazarus is so badly atodds with the rest of the Bible.

If I drive out demons by Beelzebub...

The answer may be in observing how Jesus dealt with the Pharisees on an earlieroccasion. In Matthew 12:22 Jesus heals a demon possessed man who was blind andmute. But when the Pharisees heard this they said:

“It is only by Beelzebub, the Prince of demons that this fellow drives out demons” (v.24).

Now Jesus could have responded to this slander in several ways. He could have quotedExodus 4:11 to show that it is God who makes man blind or mute, not demons. He couldequally have quoted 1 Kings 18:27 and 2 Kings 1:3 to show that Baal-Zebub, the God ofEkron, had failed to prove his existence in the days of Elijah. But he didn’t. InsteadJesus counters with irony:

“If I drive out demons by Beelzebub, by whom do your people drive them out? So thenthey will be your judges”. (Matthew 12:27)

The comment “so then they will be your judges” is a powerful rebuke. In saying thisJesus threw the falseness of the Pharisees’ teaching right back at them. Back in the daysof the prophet Elijah, his way of dealing with the prophets of Baal was not much different(see 1 Kings 18:27). Elijah mocked them to show Israel how false they were.

The Rich Man, Lazarus, and Abraham

19

So if Jesus makes use of Pharisee beliefs in the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus weneed to ask; ‘Does Jesus confirm them, or ridicule them?’

Jesus contradicts the Pharisees’ beliefs

The first contradiction has already been mentioned. In the Jewish myth Zephaniah wasable to cross by angelic boat from one side of Hades to another. Jesus contradicts this:

“a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot,nor can anyone else cross over from there to us” (v.26)

Another contradiction is that in the myth Abraham, Isaac and Jacob intercede for those intorment in Hades.

“As they looked at all the torments they called out, praying before the Lord Almightysaying, ‘We pray you on behalf of those who are in all these torments so you mighthave mercy on all of them.’ And when I saw them, I said to the angel who spoke withme, ‘Who are they?’ He said ‘Those who beseech the Lord are Abraham and Isaacand Jacob”. (Apoc. Zeph. 11:1-2).

But Jesus contradicts this. Instead he has Abraham refusing to help relieve the RichMan’s suffering:

“now he is comforted and you are in agony” (v.25)

Another contradiction is that in other Jewish myths Abraham is credited with the abilityto do what the Rich Man asks (v.27) and resurrect the dead. For example in the 1stCentury Jewish fiction The Testament of Abraham the patriarch Abraham pleads for thedead and returns 7,000 to the living.

“Then Abraham arose and fell upon the earth, and [the Angel of] Death with him, andGod sent a spirit of life into the dead and they were made alive again.” (Testament ofAbraham ‘A’ 18:11).

But Jesus again contradicts the myths, and has Abraham refusing to raise Lazarus:

“They have Moses and the Prophets, let them listen to them” (v.29)

The Rich Man, Lazarus, and Abraham

20

This reflects Jesus’ own condemnation of the Pharisees in John 5:39.

Jesus Ridicules False Teaching

There is only one solution left that will explain why Jesus should deliberately choose totell a parable drawn from the Pharisees’ superstitions. This is that Jesus was showing theteaching to be false by exposing it.

And how? By making the main characters in this parable real people: Caiaphas andSimon of Bethany.

According to the Pharisees’ view of the universe, Simon, as a leper (and therefore a“sinner”) should after his death at Bethany have descended to be tormented in the fierypart of Hades. Caiaphas on the other hand, would, as high priest, at the very top of theJewish religious hierarchy, be guaranteed a pleasant welcome by Abraham on the otherside of the underworld.

And yet Jesus told them a version of their teaching which had the beggar Lazarusreceived by Abraham, while the wealthy high priest, clothed in purple and fine linen,descended into the flames.

To add ‘burning coals’, Jesus told how the high priest called on “Father Abraham” toshow mercy, and Abraham refused. (The mythical ferryboat across the chasm in Hadeswas not in service!). Nor was Abraham inclined to help the Rich Man who had enjoyedsuch a good life on earth (v.25).

Then, as a final rebuke, Jesus has Caiaphas ask Abraham to send Simon the Leper back tothe house of Annas in Jerusalem to warn his brothers-in-law. But again Abraham refuses,twice.

“They will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead”. (Luke 16:31)

In this refusal Christ has Abraham promising Caiaphas the same torment in the fire forhis entire household: Eleazar, Jonathan, Theophilus, Matthias, and Annas the Younger,and no doubt his father-in-law Annas the Elder also.

No wonder, then, that this is the last of the series of parables in Luke Ch.14-16 eitheraddressed to the Pharisees, or with the Pharisees present.

The Rich Man, Lazarus, and Abraham

21

In the next verse (Luke 17:1) the Pharisees are gone, and Jesus is left alone with thedisciples.

CONCLUSIONS

1. The parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus is not as simple as it appears. Some of thekeys (purple and fine linen, the beggar covered in sores, the crumbs from the richman’s table) can only be understood by comparison with other Old Testament andNew Testament passages.

2. The parable contains some details where a knowledge of history (the five brothersmentioned by Josephus), or of contemporary beliefs (the Bosom of Abraham), can behelpful.

3. Even without these the parable certainly does not support modern ideas aboutheaven-going.

4. The parable cannot be literal. Caiaphas did not literally die and descend to Hades.He was still very much alive in Acts 4:6. Likewise although Abraham refused toraise Lazarus in the parable, in reality Jesus did raise Lazarus. But Jesus says in John11:11 that Lazarus “slept”; he was not literally in Abraham’s Bosom. And finally ofcourse we know from Hebrews 11:13, 39-40 that Abraham is not literally presidingover the underworld; he is dead, awaiting the resurrection.

The only thing that is literal about the parable is the prophecy of Luke 16:31 that wasfulfilled in John 12:10 when Caiaphas and his family tried to kill Lazarus rather thanaccept the fact that Jesus had raised him from the dead.

Steven Cox

QUESTIONS

1. Why did Jesus speak in parables?2. What does the Bible teach about death?3. Who was Simon of Bethany?4. Who was the Rich Man?5. Who was his father?